Radaractive

Search This Blog

Sunday, May 19, 2019

There is a section of Genesis that is baffling to many people, myself included. Although Jacob's name means supplanter and he lived up to it, he was the one having his rights taken away by Laban. Jacob devised an arrangement to obtain his wages through breeding Laban's flocks.

Laban gets the plain ones, Jacob keeps those with spots and speckles. But what was happening with the almond and other sticks in the water trough? Mockers point to this section of Genesis to claim that Jacob was using some kind of folk magic, so the Bible is false. Not only is this a hasty generalization and a straw man (claiming the Bible says something that is not there), but they take the passage out of context. They are also showing their ignorance of the medicinal properties of the branches.

Long before the science of genetics was initiated by Gregor Mendel (peas be upon him), we see genetic traits being used here. I'll allow that the hand of God was involved to give Jacob success, but there is also some science to be learned here.

Chapters 30–31 of Genesis have often come under attack and touted as being an example of folklore, superstition, and primitive veterinary understanding. But when recognizing that divine providence was at work, coupled with astute botanical knowledge, the picture rapidly changes. Research into botanical and herbal remedies over the past few decades has exonerated the methodologies which Jacob used with Laban’s flocks. Indeed, some of the same botanical specimens Jacob utilized are now being used to supplement livestock feed and are used as veterinary treatments on several diseases and conditions.

Sunday, May 12, 2019

People who pay attention to paleontology often hear about dinosaur fossils being discovered in the Hell Creek Formation down Montana way and the surrounding area. We also hear about many fossils being discovered in China (but scientists need to weed out the fakes), and Inner Mongolia has the Iren Dabasu Formation that yields a passel of dinosaur fossils as well. There are startling similarities in the formations

Members of the dust-to-dinosaur cabal tell stories to keep their deep time anti-creation worldview going, tending to gloss over or even omit important details. In all of these places, fossils are a mixture of marine and land animals. Uniformitarian geologists will allow that water was involved, but they refuse to admit that such large scale global activity is best explained by the Genesis Flood.

I recently completed an online college course on Cretaceous dinosaurs from China, centering on fossils from the Erlian Formation. These rock layers lie in a big basin near the Mongolian border. Clues from the Erlian reminded me of Cretaceous layers of the western United States. . . .

The Erlian Basin occupies a surface area of 50,000 square miles. Mountains border its vast, landlocked sediments, and other basins surround those mountains. Its name comes from a nearby town that lies 480 miles from the nearest ocean. My course instructor said that a system of ancient rivers deposited the Erlian Formation’s Cretaceous layers. He referred to the formation as an ecosystem. As the course progressed, however, details emerged that contradicted his teachings.

Sunday, May 05, 2019

Imagine my surprise when I encountered Drs. Jeff Tomkins and Jerry Bergman walking along the shore collecting genetic driftwood. We commenced discussing how proponents of muck-to-milliner evolution who patrol the internet seem to have a passel of enthusiasm but lack knowledge. The fundamentally flawed paradigm of evolution constantly needs rescuing.

In our last exciting episode, we saw that the Big Bang receives continual rescuing. (Indeed, Eric Lerner wrote The Big Bang Never Happened and advocated the unscientific plasma cosmology instead.) This post is more down to earth (heh!) as we see problems in biological evolution keeps running into trouble. The acolytes in Darwin's cult of death seem unaware that scientists are unable to fix their significant problems.Traditional Darwinism was dragged out to Boot Hill and put in a shallow grave, but it was brought back through some rearrangements and additions. This was called neo-Darwinism, or the neo-Darwin Synthesis. (Many folks still keep it short by referring to it as Darwinism because we expect them to understand that we are still talking about universal common ancestor evolution.) Even with all of this argle-bargle, some scientists realized that evolutionary concepts simply do not work.Various alternatives were proposed, such as Richard Goldschmidt's "hopeful monster" (short form: a bird laid an egg and something else hatched), which was revised by Stephen Jay Gould as punctuated equilibrium. Since Darwinism had no evidence, they proposed other ideas that had no evidence. This is called logic. See how secular science works?Riding a more traditional trail, some mavericks still admitted lack of evidence and proposed the Third Way. Another effort was the Neutral Model. One thing the sudden appearance conjecture and those other two models have in common is that they are attempts to deny the Creator his due. They also ignore the fact that evidence supports recent creation, not any form of something evolving into something else entirely.

Because of grievous deficiencies in the standard neo-Darwinian Model of evolution, which is largely selection driven, scientists proposed an alternative postulate called the ‘Neutral Model’ in the late 1960s. The Neutral Model is also mutation driven, but selection is deemed to be an insignificant force of change. Instead, random genetic drift is alleged to be the main driver. Since its inception, the Neutral Model has come to be incorporated in many theoretical evolutionary scenarios at some level. However, due to numerous discoveries in genomics and genome function, the Neutral Model has also become deficient, prompting a new move in science called the ‘Extended Evolutionary Synthesis’ or ‘The Third Way’, which takes a position of blissful ignorance and offers nothing tangible to extend or support evolutionary theory. While Third Way proponents recognize the deficiency of all popular evolutionary models, they maintain that more research is needed to elucidate unknown evolutionary mechanisms and processes despite the fact that the progress of scientific discovery is revealing nothing but unimaginable complexity.

Sunday, April 28, 2019

The Big Bang is a secular myth of origins that is held together with thread, bailing wire, and a whole heap of wishful thinking. Since its inception, it has been Frankensteined with new parts and has become unrecognizable. Because the Big Bang is metaphysics masquerading as real science, it is not surprising that physicists are chasing after ghosts of something that only exists on paper.

New discoveries are very unhelpful. While the world was amazed at the first photo of a supergiant black hole, some scientists were uneasy because it does not fit the standard model; it should not be where it is, as large as it is, so soon. See "First Ever Photo of a Black Hole" for more about that threat to the Big Bang.Instead of admitting that God created the universe just as he said and throwing the Big Bang in the trash, science continue with the procedure known as Making Things Up™. The Big Bang (also called the standard model) has holes big enough to fly a starship through, so scientists conjure up rescuing devices. Strangely, scientists are cheering for their failures. (This is a vexation to one astrophysicist, which shows that not everyone is devoted to consensus thinking and deception). The standard model needs help, so secularists invented a theoretical something called dark matter. That ghost cannot be found, so they commenced to searching for axions. No dice.

Dark matter is still a no-show. What will it take for cosmologists to give up on a fruitless quest?

Chalk up another failure; one of the candidates for dark matter, the axion, did not turn up in the latest sensitive search. For years, most hunts have focused on WIMPs or MACHOs, but those continually failed. Phys.org reports, “Dark matter experiment finds no evidence of axions.”

Sunday, April 21, 2019

Today, many Christians are observing what is commonly called Good Friday. Jesus suffered an agonizing death on the cross for our sins and he fulfilled prophecies. Not a good day for him, physically, but good for us.
His bodily Resurrection demonstrated that he had defeated death (Rom.
1:4, 2 Tim. 1:10, Isaiah 25:8). But despite some foolish songs and
claims of enthusiastic new Christians, we do not get our tickets punched
for a life of physical happiness on Earth.

We
still suffer, even though we are adopted as children of God (Rom.
8:23). Many people suffer because they are Christians, some even
experience torture and death. But if the crucifixion and Resurrection of
Jesus defeated death, what is happening? We are still waiting for
promises to be fulfilled.Some
people give up on God because they expect him to be a cosmic
wish-granting djinn, giving them what they want, when they want it.
Doesn't work that way. Jesus is God the Son, the Creator (Col 1:16, John
1:1-3). We are living in a fallen world since shortly after creation.
Sin and death entered the world when Adam sinned (Rom. 3:12 Gen. 3:19).
God's plan is to restore all things
to where they were at creation. That means no pain and death. Let me
turn you over to an article to explain it better than I can.

At
the end of his creative acts, God declared his completed creation “very
good” (Genesis 1:31). He gave the animals and humans plants to eat
(Genesis 1:29–30). The Creator promised Adam that if he disobeyed the
command to not eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, he
would surely die (Genesis 2:15–17). This, indeed, happened after Adam
disobeyed; Adam and Eve would now return to the dust from which they
were formed (Genesis 3:19). In an act of mercy, God sent them from the
Garden of Eden so that they would not live forever in their sinful state
(Genesis 3:22–23) in the now-corrupted creation (Genesis 3, Romans
8:18–22).

Sunday, April 14, 2019

If you step up on the hill for a bigger picture, you can see that a great deal of the excitement over the next ice age/global warming/global climate change has old earth philosophies embedded in its foundation. In addition to this, they use a passel of circular reasoning.

People who promote anthropogenic (man-made) global climate change tend to deny that we have a Creator who is in control and makes the rules. The world will indeed end, but on his terms, not ours. Don't be disunderstanding me! There is no reason to be cavalier about the environment because we are to be good stewards of it. But there is no reason to panic because atheists, old Earth religious folk, and leftists want to restrict our activities based on faulty science, you savvy?Many climate change adherents appeal to consensus groupthink, and even punish those within their cult who disagree. Indeed the entire scientific process for this is contrary to real science, The narrative drives the research in climate change much the same as it does in fish-to-fool evolution. Contrary evidence is ignored or suppressed to keep the faulty climate science and leftist agendas going."Did you say cult, Cowboy Bob?"You betcha. If you study on it and use the helpful links, you can see that many global climate change proponents appeal to emotion and manipulation, twist scientific facts, and have an overall cultic approach. Ever try to get a cultist to read a Christian tract? Same with these types, but religious cultists do not tend to get as overwrought as the climate folks.It is dangerous to tamper with things that are not fully understood and to act on one aspect. For example, the The Great Chinese Famine was caused in part by Mao's insistence on killing millions of sparrows, and this had severe repercussions. Climate change activists want to change carbon dioxide. Plants need that so they can survive, and they gleefully give us oxygen. Climate is complicated, old son.Old Earth believers and climate change people base their beliefs on several areas that include computer models that use insufficient information and the Milankovitch (astronomical) theory. Evolutionists, cosmologists, and others prefer to keep their narratives going, so they rely on bad theories because they have nothing better to use. The Milankovitch theory and papers supporting it are poor science, using assumptions and circular reasoning; deep time is assumed and skewed data are used, so deep time results are achieved.

The real issue in the climate change debate is climate sensitivity. If the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere were to double while everything else stayed the same, the increase in global average surface temperatures would be small, only about 1°C (less than 2°F).4

. . .

Scientists worried about climate change tend to think climate sensitivity is very high. Those who are less concerned believe climate sensitivity is low. If we ignore questionable research, there are two main reasons some researchers think climate sensitivity is high.

Sunday, April 07, 2019

Scientists have been tinkering with the Creator's handiwork, but that is what a lot of them do; I think it is just part of human nature. Proponents of universal common ancestor evolution have been manipulating DNA as if it was a new bendable action figure.

Of course, when secularists ignore God, they make their own rules and come up with viperine philosophies like genetic determinism and eugenics, and so on. Indeed, naturalists make their own ethics regarding scientific advances that fit dystopian science fiction stories. They make chimeras through DNA tampering while ignoring not only ethical concerns, but the fact that DNA demonstrates the work of the Master Engineer: it contains information.

Researchers hatched up hachimoji DNA by doubling the letters of the real thing. Through logic that only works in the secularist mind, they are saying (with the help of the lapdog media in the secular science industry) that maybe life evolved somewhere with this configuration. There are a couple of problems.Let me retell an old story to help emphasize a point:

A group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. They elected one scientist to go and tell God that he was now irrelevant.

The scientist walked up to God the Son and said, “God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We’re can clone people and do many other things that seem miraculous, so why don’t you just go on and leave us alone?”

God listened patiently and then said, “All right, how about if we have a man-making contest?”

The scientist said, “Okay, we can do that!”

“But,” God added, “we’re going to do this just like I did when I made Adam.”

The scientist said, “You got it”, and bent down and grabbed a handful of dirt.

Jesus (Col. 1:16) looked at him and said, “Not so fast. Go get your own dirt.”

First, they are only proving that they can intelligently design something using existing materials and manipulating it with their knowledge and equipment — these tinhorns didn't get their own dirt. Second, the whole thing simply will not work with an eight-letter alphabet; it's not really good for anything. Ironically, they are actually supporting special creation!

A research group led by Dr Steven Benner at the Foundation for Applied Molecular Evolution (FAME)5 in Alachua, Florida has created four extra DNA letters. They recently published a paper on their work in the prestigious journal Science6 and, as we have already seen, it caused a flurry of ‘tweets’ and re-postings. By tweaking the structure of the already-existing four bases, adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G) and thymine (T), they have expanded the DNA alphabet from four to eight letters. The two extra pairs of letters include ‘S’ and ‘B’, and ‘P’ and ‘Z’. The researchers have named the resulting eight-letter alphabet “hachimoji”, which is Japanese for “eight” and “letter”.

. . .

These four new nucleotides are interesting, but they are not truly innovative. How about a pair of bases with four hydrogen bonds? Or a base with a steroid structure, like that of progesterone or testosterone? No, they are not pursuing radical new structures like these, because humans are better at copying and modifying existing things than they are at inventing brand new things from scratch. In the end, all of their work testifies to how much thought must go into the designing of any new ‘thing’. Despite the headlines, this argues against naturalistic evolution.

Question Evolution Day

TheReligionofPeace.com

Contributors

The best thing to give to your enemy is forgiveness; to an opponent, tolerance; to a friend, your heart; to your child, a good example; to a father, deference; to your mother, conduct that will make her proud of you; to yourself, respect; to all men, charity.Francis Maitland Balfour

The ultimate determinate in the struggle now going on for the world will not be bombs and rockets but a test of wills and ideas – a trial of spiritual resolve; the values we hold, the beliefs we cherish and the ideas to which we are dedicated — Ronald Reagan

What is the network dealio?

Professional contact information

Please email radarbinder@comcast.net to contact me professionally. I consult and sell software, hardware and services to companies, organizations and government entities throughout North America.

The best thing to give to your enemy is forgiveness; to an opponent, tolerance; to a friend, your heart; to your child, a good example; to a father, deference; to your mother, conduct that will make her proud of you; to yourself, respect; to all men, charity.Francis Maitland Balfour